Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1887-04-02
THE PROPOSED RAILROAD Law.

SPEOoSN w tuC
proposed to be enacted at Jefferson
City have not read a single one Of the
bills under discussion. AS a conse
quence the criticisms made are many
OF them ridiculous and nonsensical.
In this issue we print house bill
number $40, the bill prepared by the
on internal improvements,
and which failed of passage on March
8. This bill was the result of several
weeks careful deiiberation, and was
only matured after hearing all sides of
the question discussed, after comparing
all the bills submitted, aud after a
painstaking investigation of the con-
stitutional questions involved. 1t was
even more than this, for there was
brought. into it the deliberations of
such men as Senators Harmon and
Parcher in former sessions. This bill
and senate bill number 293 were sub
mitted at the same time. They were
almost Identical, and were the product
OF the joint committees of both houses,
and though probably not perfect, were
as nearly so as it was possible for able
and earnest men to make them. As
Senator Harmon said to us in a letter
at the time the bills were submitted,
"ThOugh the bill (senate bill number
293) may not contain all that. we
should like to have, still, If it passes,
Missouri will have the best railroad
law of any state in the union" No
m was better qualified to utter this
opinion than he. How he labored to
secure the adoption of the legislation
all know. Like a modern Tiberius
Gracious he stood tor the rights of the
people. Cool, calm, brave, he with
stood all assaults, undaunted whilst
the prospect of victory remained, but
hope once gone fell at his post of duty,
the victim Of the assaults of unpatriot-
ic foes. We invite the attention of our
readers to the fruits of the labors OF
this faithful representative and his col.
leagues. Scan it carefully, section by
section. Read it; not once or twice,
but several times; it will grow upon
you. 1t is a big subject. Do not
think when you see apparent repeti-
tions that they are "vain" ones.
Each one covers a new shade of mean
ing, guarding some point against mis-
Interpretation. With the subject we'll
in mind the law is plain, practicable
and easily understood.
The bill prevents extortionate
charges. Surely no n will claim
that extortion should be permitted.
The bill prevents discrimination. Is
not that right! If man goes to buy
ten letter postage stamps he pays two
cents apiece for them. If a richer man
wants to buy a hundred he also must
pay two cents each for them. Is there
anything wrong about that2 Should
NV . puO1lS OC u1duC W lICdk
all alike? Most certainly.
II authorizes the railroad commits
sioners to make fair rates of freight for
all railroads, and provides that these
shall be considered as prima facie evi.
dence of reasonable maximum rates in
all courts of the state. This is the
law i'll illinois, has been for thirteen
years, and is found to work well
there. The constitution Of that state ia
identical with u own upon that
point, word for word, so that all lili-
CATION upon it is res adjudtcata-set-
lied TO u hand.
1t requires q continuous carriage OF
freight. Is not that right? The ship
per is certainly entitled to have bis
goods forwarded without delay. The
common law would guarantee him as
much; section 3 OF the bill does
no more.
1t provides that car shall be fur
nished on demand. Where is the
wrong in that? 1t is the duty of the
railroad to furnish cars. That is what
it is for if it is for anything. Iu this
the common law would, for a failure,
furnish a remedy in damages, and Sec
ton 6 only makes the matter plain,
fair and square.
1t covers some minor details of re-
ceipts to which no one can object, aud
provides against evasions of the law.
1t declares that equal facilities must
be afforded to all persons. That Ia
surely right.
" forbids pooling between railroads,
h'system which has destroyed competi.
non and placed the people at the mercy
of railway corporations. Is moi tina,
proper? For years oranges. boards OF
trade and merchants generally have
been crying out against the injustice
and unfairness of the pool. Why then
should it not be abolishedP
1t makes the railroad, commissioner.
parties to suits in event of certain vio-
lations of the law, as does the Illinoii
statute. Is not that right2 VIVA,
chance have individuals against these
corporations! The state may have q
few suits to pay for under such a law
but they will be very few and soor
cease. as in Illinois, whereas if left te
individuals every IL OF them would
be appealed to the supreme court anc
litigants be worn out and discouraged
Finally, it provides adequate penal
ties for violations of the law. One Of
the objections urged against the bill Is,
that some OF these penalties are tu
severe. The penalty against murder
is a terrible one, it is death, but tina,
does not worry the mind of the law
abiding man. The penalty for burglary
aud larceny is the ~penitentiary, but an
honest man never thinks of that. AL
that the railway companies have to do
in order to be equally Indifferent as to
the penalties is to obey the law.
There is nothing in the bill that car
impair the value of railroad property
unless that value comes by some un.
fair means. 1t is q bill in the interest
of hopesty and equality.
49, d
Il Is, pracfs.z 10, the Ian now In iii.
nois, AID has been for years: Al first
the railway companies fought It bitter.